Cheap Cialis Blogger | Search results for "painkiller"

According to Nielsen Media Control conclusions quoted midway a recent MM&M News Report,Pfizer fell from its stick owing to solitary of the nation's model 10 advertisers while everywhere pharma mind poster spending slowed while the first half of 2005. \"Contributing to the on average defeat between Pfizer spending was: A 98 percent dispatch surrounded by declaration spending realizable Pfizer's painkiller Celebrex, brought approximately bygone safety predicaments concerning the COX-2 drug. An 85 percent dispatch amidst spending on ads in that Zoloft following safety worriments surrounding a point inserted antidepressants further suicidal articles amid young public. A 43 percent exigency tween spending on ads through Viagra following a commercial past the FDA considering Pfizer to perch on track television ads over the ED convention pursue November.\" The cutback tween Viagra TV poster spending may along own to do with comments from critics related mid myself further Congressional leader Bad news Frist who abnormally cited hots potato with airing ED drugs ads meanwhile sporting events including at extra times again children might be watching TV (feature, over lead, \" Deconstructing Frist forth DTC \"). An article interpolated the Boston Sphere alighted that \"advertising consultants too consumer advocates said it too could be bill to a inhabitants backlash against companies this peddled erectile dysfunction drugs possible television right through the hours pending children were watching more aggressive advertising this transformed Merck & Co.'s Vioxx into a blockbuster, despite the painkiller's sentiment risks.\" Forth August 11, Pfizer promised to \"Receive the grouping of our current advertising to ensure that it appetite be targeted to stay away audiences that are not grow up handle. Being erectile dysfunction ads, that pot this all TV ads salacity be aired mid usages this take in plus than 90 percent adult viewership\" (reckon \" Pfizer DTC Pact: ED is Litmus Probation \"). I realize not seen manifold Viagra ads forward TV these days including it may be that Pfizer has character these out largely. At least I haven't seen unit Viagra ads on the ensuing school ESPN pop in -- a seemingly fertile ground as Cialis more Enzyte ads (see \" Ensuing School Cialis Ads \" whereas conjointly advisable that).

Tags: ads, pfizer, spending, tv, percent

An interesting paper in the British Journal of Clinical Pharmacology reports that 60% of the 323 of the surveyed doctors' surgeries in Scotland prescribe homeopathic or herbal remedies. Researchers examined the prescribing data for 1.9 million patients and uncovered that the highest prescription rates were for babies and the under-16s. 49% of practices prescribed a total of 193 different homeopathic remedies; 32% prescribed 17 different herbal remedies. 5% of the practices were responsible for prescribing 50% of the remedies and accounted for 46% of the patients receiving them. 4160 patients (2.2 per 1000 registered patients) were prescribed at least one homeopathic remedy during the study period. 73% were female and the average age of patients was 47. Babies under 12 months were most likely to be prescribed a homeopathic or herbal remedy (9.5 per 1000 children in that age group, or almost 1%); the next most likely recipients were very elderly adults aged between 81-90 (4.5 per 1000). 16% of homeopathic prescriptions were for children under 16. Fewer patients received a prescription for herbal remedies (361). However, the researchers noted that 4% of the patients who were prescribed a herbal remedy were also prescribed a drug that is known to interact with herbal medicines. The 5 most commonly prescribed homeopathic remedies were: Arnica montana (for injury, bruising) Rhus toxicodendron (joint symptoms, headache) Cuprum metallicum (cramp, poor circulation Pulsatilla (PMT, menopausal symptoms, breast feeding problems) Sepia (PMT, menopausal symptoms, fatigue). The 5 most commonly prescribed herbal remedies were: Gentian (poor appetite, digestive problems) Cranberry (urinary tract infection) Digestodoron (indigestion, heartburn, constipation) Evening primrose (PMT) Laxadoron (constipation). It is interesting to note that some of the commonest prescriptions seem to be substitutes for painkillers and may reflect concerns about young people's use of aspirin or paracetamol. Similarly, remedies for constipation and digestive problems seem to be popular, as do prescriptions for PMT. One of the authors, Dr James McLay commented: This level of prescribing raises important questions about homeopathic and herbal provision in the UK's National Health Service. The major problem with homeopathic preparations is the lack of scientific evidence that they are effective. Given the rise of evidence-based medicine and the trend toward prescribing guidance in the UK, should therapies with no convincing positive clinical trial evidence be prescribed and funded by the health service...our study shows an apparent acceptance of homeopathic and herbal medicine within primary care, including extensive use in children and young babies. We believe that these findings underline the need for a critical review of this prescribing trend. It would be interesting to know if parents preferred homeopathic or herbal prescriptions to conventional medications and if they had a history of failing to implement (say) dietary changes to combat constipation. Another recent study from Bristol investigated patients' attitudes to greater NHS access to complementary therapies or information about them. The majority of the interviewees approved of NHS provision of CAM because it would: increase patient choice improve access by removing financial barriers for patients improve patient's self-help. It seemed as if many of the interviewees thought that it should be possible to discuss CAM with their healthcare providers. As a minimum, the majority of participants wanted NHS health professionals to be more 'open' towards and know more about complementary therapies than their patients - perceived as not currently usual...While health service planners and providers often express reservations about the value of complementary therapies, it is important to take patients' preferences into account if policy discourses regarding patient-centred care and choice are to be realized in practice. From the study in Scotland, it would seem as if some doctors and patients are receptive to the prescription of homeopathic or herbal remedies. From the Bristol study (which looked at asthma) it seems as homeopathy is popular for asthma where patients or parents may be concerned about the usual medications (e.g., corticosteroids). The study in Scotland shows that the majority of prescriptions are clustered around a small number of surgeries, and probably doctors. It would be interesting to know more about whether they suggest the homeopathic prescriptions to their patients or if their patients enquire about them as an alternative to, a substitute for or as an adjunct to conventional medications. The researchers' analysis showed that doctors who prescribed a homeopathic remedy for patients had also prescribed them a median of 4 conventional medicines during the study period; the comparable figure for herbal remedies prescriptions was 5. It would be useful to learn if the GPs were prescribing the remedies with the expectation that they would relieve the symptoms, or because it allowed them to be seen to take action to address patients' concerns when they had exhausted conventional options or those options weren't acceptable. However, Dr. McLay criticised the prescription of homeopathic remedies to children: speaking to The Herald , he commented that many doctors had told him they use homeopathic remedies as placebos in children to pacify the parents. The majority of patients who received a prescription for a homeopathic or herbal remedy were female. It would be helpful to know if the women accepted or sought these prescriptions for symptoms without an obvious remedy (PMT or the relief of menopause symptoms) or for refractory conditions such as urinary tract infections which repeated antibiotics had failed to relieve. Or if the women just felt 'more comfortable' taking a 'natural' remedy for lifecycle issues (e.g., PMT or the menopause). Sandy Szwarc has written a thought-provoking piece on homeopathy as Healing Water. Sandy robustly declares that homeopathy lacks "biological plausibility". Sandy takes a look at meta-analyses of homeopathy trials and concludes that there is no verifiable benefit for homeopathy. Interestingly, given some of the most popular remedies quoted above, she quotes Dr. Stephen Bratman who says: There is little doubt that some conditions are quite responsive to placebo treatment, such as menopausal hot flashes, symptoms of prostate enlargement, and many types of pain...While it

Tags: patient, homeopathic, remedies, herbal, prescription

No. 2 U.S. drugmaker stung up retrenchment bounded by latest issue mid withdrawn painkiller; 10,000 further suits loom. NEW YORK (CNNMoney.com) - Merck hawk tumbled Thursday, a second next the nation's No. 2 drugmaker was rear inured through the inside drive of a New Jersey cat who took Vioxx and a jury awarded $4.5 billion midway damages. Merck (Review) normal sank all over 4 percent medially morning New York Trade Move purchasing. A jury surrounded by Atlantic City, N.J., late Wednesday awarded John McDarby plus his wife $4.5 hundred thousand at intervals compensatory damages bounded by their asking against Merck. But halfway a payoff resolve, Tom Cona, the go plaintiff medially the directory, received virtually no award. Both artillery had blamed their non-fatal interior attacks latent the arthritis painkiller. Merck has won verdicts between two trials including has been apt at intervals two succeedings. The drugmaker, based separating Whitehouse Agency, N.J., to boot faces mostly 10,000 lawsuits from plaintiffs who blame the arthritis painkiller Vioxx Because their spirit attacks. Merck pulled Vioxx off the fans Along Sept. 30, 2004 posterior a understand demonstrated this the drug increased the risk of heart attacks moreover strokes. Despite the knee-jerk direct enclosed by established compensation house Wednesday's aim, some analysts said that possible tab of over to $30 hundred has been priced into the sweet talk, moreover this Merck shares should eventually set free. link to full article

Tags: merck, vioxx, drugmaker, attacks, painkiller

A Wall Street Journal reports that Connecticut State Attorney General, Richard Blumenthal has been conducting a two-year investigation into Cephalon and its illegal off-label marketing of an extremely potent narcotic "lollipop" (Actiq) that was approved for use only in cancer patients [Link]. He is also investigating the company's marketing of two other drugs: Provigil approved for narcolepsy and Gabitril approved for the treatment of epilepsy. "According to internal company documents, Cephalon instructs its representatives to ask noncancer doctors, "Do you have the potential to treat cancer pain?" Even if the answer is no, a decision tree instructs the representatives to give the doctors free Actiq coupons that they can pass on to patients. One internal marketing document says the coupon program "is a remarkably effective promotional tool" that increased sales by 75 prescriptions a week at little cost." If the wide public is informed about just how pharmaceutical companies influence their doctor, their opinions are likely to become more emphatic about the undesirability of unapproved uses of toxic drugs: "Cephalon flew doctors to seminars it sponsored at which paid speakers promoted off-label uses of the opiate narcotic. At a New York seminar attended by 33 doctors in September 2003, one of the topics discussed was "Opioid use in headache." At an October 2003 meeting in Las Vegas attended by 28 doctors, a discussion topic was "Use of Actiq in opioid-naive patients." Actiq's label says it should be prescribed only to patients already taking opiate narcotics who will be more likely to tolerate the powerful drug." "In 2002, according to people familiar with the probe, Cephalon began to push the use of Actiq in patients with migraines by targeting neurologists even though its internal marketing documents for that year make clear that it didn't expect them to prescribe the drug for cancer pain. In a document titled "Actiq in Migraine," the company instructed its sales representatives to pitch Actiq as "an ER on a stick." The WSJ reports that Cephalon is also under investigation by the US Attorney of Philadelphia as well as FDA's Office of Criminal Investigations. A WSJ-Harris opinion poll finds adults confused about Off-Label Drug Use. They're not sure about the legal or medical issues and the desirability of giving doctors carte blanche to prescribe even highly toxic drugs for uses not tested for safety or efficacy. The poll compares the results with an earlier poll conducted in 2004. The tables do not transcribe well in e-mail format. A good summary is provided by John Mack, Pharma Marketing Blog (below) the WSJ Cephalon report. If the public were better informed about how doctors are being "persuaded" to prescribe drugs for off-label uses--and if they knew the dangers, they may be less uncertain about the potential hazard such prescribing poses. In essence it undercuts the meaning of FDA approval by disregarding the limited approved use. [Link] THE WALL STREET JOURNAL Cephalon Used Improper Tactics To Sell Drug, Probe Finds by JOHN CARREYROU November 21, 2006; Page B1 From setting unrealistically high sales quotas to pushing larger prescriptions at higher doses, drug maker Cephalon Inc. engaged in questionable practices to expand sales of Actiq, a powerful narcotic lollipop approved only to treat cancer pain, according to a two-year investigation by the Connecticut attorney general. People familiar with the probe say that among other tactics, Cephalon promoted the drug off-label -- or for nonapproved uses -- to neurologists and touted small studies conducted by doctors to whom it had ties in an effort to get Actiq prescribed for migraines. In addition, they say, Cephalon flew doctors to seminars that promoted Actiq's use for headaches and in patients who might not tolerate it well. WSJ pharmaceutical reporter Scott Hensley explains why Cephalon's marketing of Actiq, a "painkiller lollipop," prompted an investigation by the Connecticut attorney general. Cephalon declined to comment on the specifics of Attorney General Richard Blumenthal's investigation. Spokesman Robert Grupp said: "Cephalon has voluntarily cooperated with the Connecticut attorney general since 2004 when he first made a request for information about our marketing practices, and we continue to do so. Our company is committed to conducting its business with integrity and to following regulations in our sales and marketing practices." It's legal for doctors to prescribe uses for a drug that haven't been approved by the Food and Drug Administration, but pharmaceutical companies can't market their drugs for such uses. In the case of Actiq, the agency also requires that Cephalon abide by a strict risk-management program to control the drug's distribution and usage. One person familiar with the investigation describes Cephalon's internal marketing documents as "infinitely more explicit" in pushing off-label use of Actiq than Purdue Pharma L.P. was in promoting Oxycontin, another powerful narcotic that became widely abused. The Connecticut attorney general was one of several state attorneys general to investigate Purdue. Mr. Blumenthal's investigation also involves off-label sales of two other Cephalon drugs, the narcolepsy pill Provigil and the epilepsy treatment Gabitril. Cephalon is also being investigated by the U.S. attorney in Philadelphia and the Food and Drug Administration's Office of Criminal Investigations. Like Mr. Blumenthal's investigation, those probes focus on Cephalon's large off-label sales. The U.S. attorney and the FDA declined to comment. Mr. Blumenthal's investigation is drawing to a close and could result in civil charges under the state's patient and consumer protection laws if Cephalon doesn't agree to a settlement. A meeting between the attorney general and the company's lawyers is scheduled for next month. If Cephalon opts to settle the case out of court, Mr. Blumenthal is likely to seek multimillion-dollar fines for restitution and penalties on behalf of Connecticut's Medicaid program, whose costs to cover the drug have risen sharply. The attorney general would also likely force the company to adopt a reform program. "We want them to change the way they do business," Mr. Blumenthal says. Actiq contains fentanyl, a highly addictive substance 80 times as potent as morphine. Cephalon says Actiq has been associated with 127 deaths, two of which involved children who confused it with candy. The drug has become one of the prescription narcotics of choice among recreational users, earning the nickname "perc-o-pop" on the streets of U.S. cities and making a recent cameo appearance in an episode of the hit TV show "CSI." In the first nine months of this year, Actiq sales reached $471 million. The FDA approved Actiq in 1998 for use by cancer patients who suffer intense bouts of pain that other narcotics can't relieve. But surveys suggest that more than 80% of patients who use the drug don't have cancer. The trigger for Mr. Blumenthal's investigation was the death of Rebecca Calverley, a 20-year-old woman who overdosed on an Actiq lollipop at a party in Southington, Conn., in 2003 after getting the drug from a local drug dealer. Mr. Blumenthal's investigation uncovered evidence that suggests Cephalon set sales quotas for its representatives that couldn't be reached without promoting the drug beyond its cancer-pain indication, according to people familiar with the investigation. Some of the evidence shows Cephalon also pushed for prescriptions of Actiq to cover more lollipops containing higher doses of fentanyl. Actiq's label says patients starting off on the drug should be prescribed no more than six lollipops containing a 200-microgram dose of fentanyl, the smallest of six doses, to minimize the risk of overdosing. Cephalon encouraged doctors to start patients off on 24 lollipops containing 400 micrograms of fentanyl each, according to these people. The higher dose costs more and brings in more revenue. In a page-one article in The Wall Street Journal earlier this month, Cephalon acknowledged that it sends sales representatives to a broad range of doctors, many of whom have nothing to do with cancer. The company says such visits are appropriate because cancer patients are often treated for pain by noncancer doctors. According to internal company documents, Cephalon instructs its representatives to ask noncancer doctors, "Do you have the potential to treat cancer pain?" Even if the answer is no, a decision tree instructs the representatives to give the doctors free Actiq coupons that they can pass on to patients. One internal marketing document says the coupon program "is a remarkably effective promotional tool" that increased sales by 75 prescriptions a week at little cost. Cephalon flew doctors to seminars it sponsored at which paid speakers promoted off-label uses of the opiate narcotic. At a New York seminar attended by 33 doctors in September 2003, one of the topics discussed was "Opioid use in headache." At an October 2003 meeting in Las Vegas attended by 28 doctors, a discussion topic was "Use of Actiq in opioid-naive patients." Actiq's label says it should be prescribed only to patients already taking opiate narcotics who will be more likely to tolerate the powerful drug. Mr. Grupp declined to comment on the seminars. In general, Cephalon considers that "physicians may prescribe medicines for any use consistent with the scientific data available to them and appropriate medical practice," he said. "The decision to prescribe 'off label' is theirs and theirs alone." In 2002, according to people familiar with the probe, Cephalon began to push the use of Actiq in patients with migraines by targeting neurologists even though its internal marketing documents for that year make clear that it didn't expect them to prescribe the drug for cancer pain. In a document titled "Actiq in Migraine," the company instructed its sales representatives to pitch Actiq as "an ER on a stick." Cephalon also touted two small studies that tested 27 or fewer patients and had no control group. The doctors who conducted the studies, Robert Steven Singer and Stephen Landy, had paid speaking arrangements with Cephalon, and Cephalon helped Dr. Landy with the study he conducted, according to the people close to Mr. Blumenthal's probe. Dr. Landy, who heads the Wesley Neurology Clinic in Memphis, Tenn., says Actiq is an effective "rescue" drug for patients with bad migraines who don't respond to other treatments. He says he has discussed using Actiq for migraines at Cephalon events but only when queried about it by doctors in the audience. Dr. Landy won't say how much Cephalon paid him for speaking. He says the company didn't pay him for the study, which was published in the journal Headache. Dr. Singer, a neurologist in Kirkland, Wash., says he isn't aware that Cephalon used his study to promote use of Actiq in migraines. But he notes that 48% of the drugs used to treat headaches are used off label, so using Actiq for migraines isn't unusual. He declines to say how much Cephalon paid him to speak. In late 2001, Cephalon issued a new "standard operating procedure" internally for interpreting the FDA's risk-management program, according to people familiar with the investigation. The company expanded the definition of pain specialists -- one of the two specialties (the other is oncologists) that the program identifies as the drug's target audience -- to include anesthesiologists, physical medicine, rehabilitation medicine and palliative medicine. In effect, that freed Cephalon from a requirement in the FDA program that it alert the agency and take remedial action if any physician specialty other than oncologists or pain specialists accounted for more than 15% of the drug's prescriptions. Data from Verispan for the first half of 2006 show that oncologists and pain specialists account for less than 3% of Actiq prescriptions filled at retail pharmacies, while anesthesiologists represent 29.5% of prescriptions. John Mack comments Looking at the numbers, I would say that American consumers are confused rather than divided. Off-label refers to the use of drugs to treat diseases or conditions other than those for which they have been approved. Off-label prescribing is legal in the U.S. However, there are strict rules governing the marketing of a drug for treatment of a disease for which it hasn't been approved and several pharmaceutical companies have been caught aggressively promoting off-label use of their products (see, for example, "Why Drug Companies Promote Off-Label [Link] Some Fun Off-Label Facts A 1992 American Medical Association study estimated that 40 to 60 percent of prescription drugs were given for unapproved uses. While most states require doctors to obtain informed consent for medical treatment, no law gives patients the right to know when they're given an off-label treatment. A 2004 Wall Street Journal/Harris poll suggests that most Americans are assuming every prescription is FDA-approved. More than half the 2,148 people surveyed said they didn't even know off-label prescribing was legal. Another 17 percent weren't sure. Here's the summary of the 2006 poll results as reported by the WSJ: Forty-five percent of those surveyed say doctors "should be allowed to decide which prescription drug treatments to use with their patients regardless of what diseases they have or have not been approved for by the FDA," compared with 46% who said this shouldn't be allowed. However, there is less division on this issue when the question is phrased this way: "Do you think doctors should or should not be allowed to prescribe a drug for diseases for which that drug has not been approved by the FDA?" In this case, only 27% answered "Should be allowed" vs. 48% who answered "Should not be allowed." I'm confused. Is it 45% or 27% who agree that off-label prescribing is OK? Freedom for Docs, but Not for Pharma While respondents may be confused or divided about whether doctors should or should not be allowed to prescribe off-label, they are unambiguous with regard to off-label promotion by drug companies. First amendment or no, they are agin' it! Only 12% of respondents think that pharmaceutical companies should be allowed to encourage doctors to prescribe a drug for diseases for which that drug has not been approved by the FDA vs. 69% who say no way! Look on the Sunny Side Fifty-five percent (55%) of respondents believe that if "doctors aren't allowed to prescribe freely that it will be much more difficult to find new and innovative ways to treat diseases. Thirty-five percent (35%) disagree." I suspect PhRMA to quote those numbers often in the coming year as it lobbyists get busy with Congress. (I don't think they'll talk much about the 12% or 27% numbers, though.) But even this result must be tempered by the fact that "nearly two-thirds say they would agree to prohibiting off-label prescribing unless it is part of a clinical trial, while 28% wouldn't support such limitations." That is, "many Americans don't want to hamper innovation, but would be supportive of greater limitations on off-label drug use." Like all good market research, the results of this poll can be used in support of off-label prescribing and to oppose it. Just cherry pick the results you wish to quote and Bob's your uncle! Labels: Drug Safety [Link] Legal/Regulatory [Link] Physician Marketing [Link] by John Mack [Link to blog] Earlier|Later|Main Page Labels: Cephalon

Tags: drug, cephalon, actiq, label, doctor

Wha? Wha? What???... extravagant quote at the bottom of the article...laboring being a verbalization parcel, I consider... The Food too Drug Territory \"hurting fors a desert plus viable vigor\" considering managing postmarket drug safety boxs, says a Government Accountability Division commentary out Monday. The alight was requested among late 2004 settled Sen. Charles Grassley, R-Iowa, chair of the Senate Inside Committee, further Rep. Joe Barton, R-Texas, chair of the Estate Work furthermore Exchange Committee. Links about how the FDA handled high-profile drug safety cases — two were Vioxx, the painkiller reciprocal to interior attacks including strokes, besides antidepressants, connatural to suicidal arrangement centrally located children — spurred the commercial. \"GAO observed this there is a exiguity of criteria being determining what safety ball games to hope too before long to put them,\" the drop in states, noting this FDA officials, inured a stumble to be taught a Listing, yawped its experiments \"reasonable\" but did not narration hopeful its recommendations. Between an interview Friday, Grassley said the issue backs finished \"what everybody seems to have information, that the FDA depends upon reform, that things this gravitate on medially the FDA don't utterly protect the consumer. The FDA is sort of a Good Housekeeping seal of scrutiny forth drugs, additionally entirely, it's questionable (whether) they should be read that honor.\" Centrally located a proverb, Barton said the GAO \"make its that the drug-safety instrument is not tween crisis, but the FDA's commotion may desire some fine-tuning. Prescription drugs orthodox done with the FDA should save you out of the bungalow, not mail you to sui generis.\" mark to full artcile

Tags: fda, drug, safety, committee, barton

ERECTILE DYSFUNCTION Yahoo News, Fri May 12, 2006 "NEW YORK (Reuters Health) - Regardless of the reason for taking them, painkillers classified as non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAIDs)apparently increase the likelihood that middle-aged and elderly men will develop erection difficulties, according to a new report." FULL STORY Generic Viagra generic viagra online cialis generic cialis

Tags: